The greater Toronto area is more than six and a half million, that would definitely put it in the top quarter or so of ML markets population wise. Considering Toronto is the major city of Canada, and the Jays its only team, it could be feasible the media market for the Jays is comparable. The Sox have a lot more competition. For example, in northern Indiana you will probably find as many Cubs, Tigers and Reds fans as Sox fans, not to mention the ubiquitous Red Sox and Yankees fans.

Chicago is the third biggest metro area and media market in the US. It is bigger by a large margin than Dallas, Detroit and Toronto. That's all I'm saying. I had my demographics argument here a while back. Don't want another.

Why are you excluding the remaining part of Michigan or the northern half of Texas (let alone much of Oklahoma)? For that matter, why would you exclusde the remaining part of Ontario, let alone the rest of western Canada?

Quote:

Originally Posted by doublem23

Probably because none of those places are important

They are important to advertisers, which is the point of the matter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SI1020

You obviously define a market differently than I do, and differently than the organizations that track this sort of thing. I guess if you're going to go with media outlets that cover each team I sort of see your point. Like if some station in Enid, Oklahoma is carrying the Rangers or something like that. To me Chicago is the third largest metro area and media market in the US. One of a small number that could actually support 2 MLB teams. I don't think a second team would work in Dallas-Fort Worth right now. As for Toronto, no matter how you slice and dice that one I don't see your point.

I define a franchise's media market the way MLB does, which is by counting all the TV homes that could potentially tune in to a local broadcast and by counting the total number that actually do so. That means when the Tulsa and OKC metro areas tune into Rangers' broadcasts exclusively, or when the Hamilton, Calgary, Winnepeg, Edmonton, and Vancouver metro areas tune into Blue Jays' broadcasts exclusively, MLB (and advertisers) definitely count them. And that's not even counting the millions of people watching from other areas of Texas, Oklahoma, and Arkansas, or the rest of Canada west of Ottawa. Total number of people watching is what matters, not the population of a team's base metro area. It is why the Rangers were able to get a much more lucrative TV deal than the Sox.

Simply put: Sox play in a much bigger metro area than Rangers, Blue Jays, and Tigers. The Rangers, Blue Jays, and Tigers play in media markets that are larger or at the very least is just as large (about 98% of the state of Michigan plus northwest Ohio) as the Sox's.

__________________"I have the ultimate respect for White Sox fans. They were as miserable as the Cubs and Red Sox fans ever were but always had the good decency to keep it to themselves. And when they finally won the World Series, they celebrated without annoying every other fan in the country." Jim Caple, ESPN (January 12, 2011)

"We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the (bleeding) obvious is the first duty of intelligent men." — George Orwell

I define a franchise's media market the way MLB does, which is by counting all the TV homes that could potentially tune in to a local broadcast and by counting the total number that actually do so. That means when the Tulsa and OKC metro areas tune into Rangers' broadcasts exclusively, or when the Hamilton, Calgary, Winnepeg, Edmonton, and Vancouver metro areas tune into Blue Jays' broadcasts exclusively, MLB (and advertisers) definitely count them. And that's not even counting the millions of people watching from other areas of Texas, Oklahoma, and Arkansas, or the rest of Canada west of Ottawa. Total number of people watching is what matters, not the population of a team's base metro area. It is why the Rangers were able to get a much more lucrative TV deal than the Sox.

Simply put: Sox play in a much bigger metro area than Rangers, Blue Jays, and Tigers. The Rangers, Blue Jays, and Tigers play in media markets that are larger or at the very least is just as large (about 98% of the state of Michigan plus northwest Ohio) as the Sox's.

I figured we were in a sense doing an apples and oranges thing. I understand and appreciate your perspective. Regarding the bolded, I could be wrong but I don't think that being a very distant second in a two team market helps the Sox any. Another thing to consider, is that despite geography population movements blur the geographical lines of fandom. Atlanta is big enough to have three professional teams survive despite having many residents who aren't from Georgia, or even the south. The Rays have struggled in part due to the fact that so many of the residents in their area are from points north and have retained their original fan allegiances. The Steelers hardly ever have a real road game due to the 4 decade long diaspora of SW PA residents in search of employment. Ex Pittsburghers are everywhere. I'll quit rambling now. Thanks for a positive discussion.

And the last AL team before the Sox, Red Sox and Yankees to win a Series? The Angels in 2002. And how far does one have to go to find another AL team to win a Series? Twenty years since Toronto won in 1993.

Perhaps we should view the Sox' championship in 2005 in the context that it was a significant accomplishment. Can the Sox get back there? With the pitching they have, I think they can, provided that Rick Hahn can make the right moves. I like what I saw from Hahn at the trade deadline and I look forward to more moves.

The franchise has figured out how to scout pitching and find it from various sources. It's the diamond where they have struggled lately. They need to find more talent for the diamond. Then they will win another title.

Detroit, for all of Illitch's commitment, hasn't been able to get it done. Fielder is already looking like a mistake. Cabrera was hurt this postseason. He's a brilliant hitter. But for how long? The pen is terrible. They have been for awhile.

Jackson swings at air. Verlander and Scherzer are good, but can they pay Scherzer? Can he do it again?

I wouldn't be surprised if the Sox got another title before the Cubs or Tigers. That would be sweet revenge.

Even if the Bears had won a Superbowl since, the '85 team would still be celebrated. That was one of the best teams evah lead by one of the most beloved football players to ever put on a uniform and a legendary defense. Even a Packer fan would admit this (except maybe the beloved football player part.)

That's just not true. That's like the saying the '91 Bulls are as celebrated as the '85 Bears. They are not because the Bulls won many titles.

__________________"I'm sorry that you don't like our manager," Williams says he told him.

"I'm sorry that you don't like our 3-4-5 hitters. Or our closer.

"I'm sorry that you don't like our third baseman and our shortstop. Or our left fielder and our right fielder.

"I'm sorry people feel this way about our club. But I also want you to know something about that:

This subject made me think that they really need to take down that 2005 World Champions banner on the outside of the park that you see on the Dan Ryan. It makes us look pathetic.

This post is ridiculous. What does the banner outside of Wrigley say? Or Pittsburgh? Kansas City? Cleveland? I've been a Sox fan since 1977. Do I want them to win more titles? Absolutely. Am I supposed to feel ashamed at the one WS title they've won since I've been a fan? Absolutely not.

__________________

A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives- Jackie Robinson

This subject made me think that they really need to take down that 2005 World Champions banner on the outside of the park that you see on the Dan Ryan. It makes us look pathetic.

Quote:

Originally Posted by spawn

This post is ridiculous. What does the banner outside of Wrigley say? Or Pittsburgh? Kansas City? Cleveland? I've been a Sox fan since 1977. Do I want them to win more titles? Absolutely. Am I supposed to feel ashamed at the one WS title they've won since I've been a fan? Absolutely not.

I agree with Spawn. Why should I give a ****? Seriously? As Spawn points out, at least 20 other teams would love to have that banner hanging outside their park. Heck, Sox fans don't have to go far to find other fans who are envious. Just drive to the Northside, or to Wisconsin, or to Michigan. I still celebrate 2005 and I am still critical of ownership and management for not sustaining that success. Since the two are far from being mutually exclusive, I'm not going to choose one or the other.

I agree with Spawn. Why should I give a ****? Seriously? As Spawn points out, at least 20 other teams would love to have that banner hanging outside their park. Heck, Sox fans don't have to go far to find other fans who are envious. Just drive to the Northside, or to Wisconsin, or to Michigan. I still celebrate 2005 and I am still critical of ownership and management for not sustaining that success. Since the two are far from being mutually exclusive, I'm not going to choose one or the other.

They shouldn't take down the banner. They should just add a new year to it.